• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Election denier who circulated Jan. 6 PowerPoint says he met with Meadows at White House

OscarLevant

Gadfly Extraordinaire
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
16,876
Reaction score
7,398
Location
San Diego
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
"...declaring a national security emergency and seizing paper ballots..."

Yeah, uhh, Houston, we have a problem



A retired U.S. Army colonel who circulated a proposal to challenge the 2020 election, including by declaring a national security emergency and seizing paper ballots, said that he visited the White House on multiple occasions after the election, spoke with President Donald Trump’s chief of staff “maybe eight to 10 times” and briefed several members of Congress on the eve of the Jan. 6 riot.

Phil Waldron, the retired colonel, was working with Trump’s outside lawyers and was part of a team that briefed the lawmakers on a PowerPoint presentation detailing “Options for 6 JAN,” Waldron told The Washington Post. He said his contribution to the presentation focused on his claims of foreign interference in the vote, as did his discussions with the White House.
A version of the presentation made its way to the White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, on Jan. 5. That information surfaced publicly this past week after the congressional committee investigating the insurrection released a letter that said Meadows had turned the document over to the committee.
 
Nah. I'm gonna wait to see what the DailyCaller has to say.
 
It was a good plan. Perfectly legal.

If it had been implemented two weeks after the election, the fraud would have been uncovered and corrected.
 
He should be brought back to active duty and court-martialed.
 
I don't understand the problem. Isn't that the entire case of the democrats Trump Russia Collusion hoax? Foreign interference in the election! Why are the democrats not going after the foreign interference, like they did in 2016. Nope, this is a Trumped up Trump case again.
 
It was a good plan. Perfectly legal.

If it had been implemented two weeks after the election, the fraud would have been uncovered and corrected.
What ****ing fraud?

Trump lost. His goons tried to overturn the election.

Go live in Russia if you want a dictatorship.
 
What ****ing fraud?

Trump lost. His goons tried to overturn the election.

Go live in Russia if you want a dictatorship.
Still stuck with your Big Lie, I see.

You have my sympathy.
 



Foreign.....







Interference......







"The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."

 
It was a good plan. Perfectly legal.

If it had been implemented two weeks after the election, the fraud would have been uncovered and corrected.

There was no fraud.
 
He should be brought back to active duty and court-martialed.
And people don't understand why many on the left are seen as either too authoritarian or fascistic.
 




Foreign.....







Interference......







"The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."

What is it with you an making these utterly retarted post?
 
It was a good plan. Perfectly legal.

If it had been implemented two weeks after the election, the fraud would have been uncovered and corrected.


Where does the president get the power to declare electronic votes invalid?
 
Oh I saw plenty of *claims* of fraud. Claims that, mysteriously, couldn't be proven in a single court of law.
So a man being caught with more than a few hundred ballots in his car.. could not be proven?
I keep forgetting just how selective some people's sight can be these days.
 
Uh huh. So how many fraudulent ballots were cast?
Oh, so now you're reneging and adjusting the parameters to suit yourself...

Yeah, I've already seen more than enough people squirm around on this issue.
I should've called it this time.
 
If Waldron went bragging to WaPo about his role in this, he's got to be another Mike Lindell.
 
Oh, so now you're reneging and adjusting the parameters to suit yourself...

No, I asked why the claims that the election were stolen we're never proven in court.

You then responded with a case that had nothing to do with any lawsuit brought forward that alleged voter fraud, (because it happened a year later, in a completely different election!) and are now pretending that a situation where someone was actually *stopped* from committing fraud counts as an example of said voter fraud.

Even though none of the fake ballots were actually cast or counted, and the dude was also found in possession of other pieces of stolen mail, indicating he wasn't actually trying to commit voter fraud but was instead stealing mail and happened to gather mail in ballots as part of his haul.

Yeah, I've already seen more than enough people squirm around on this issue.

Irony.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…